Hatfill v. Ashcroft

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding no First Amendment violation occurred where plaintiff continued to exercise his First Amendment right to comment on an investigation and seek redress for alleged wrongs committed during the course of the investigation
• “[T]he Privacy Act, being a comprehensive legislative scheme that provides a meaningful remedy for the kinds of harm Dr. Hatfill alleges he has suffered, qualifies it [as] a special factor counseling hesitation against the applicability of Bivens.”
• plaintiff failed to show that his First Amendment rights were chilled where he “continued to fully exercise his . . . right to comment on the investigation and seek redress for alleged wrongs that ha[d] purportedly been committed in the course of the investigation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).